I've taken a look at the same problem recently. My feeling is that while Cocoa is a better choice for developing Mac OS X specific stuff, Carbon may end up being more similar to other platforms, and so possibly a bit easier for this specific use. Cocoa is still very doable for the same problem - but essentially, I suspect many C++ methods would just end up being a call to an equivalent Cocoa method (though often one you've written yourself). Mixing C and C++ is not particularly ugly or hackish in most cases. You can more of less mix the two syntaxes easily enough with Apples Objective-C++ support.
It kind of depends on your specific libraries, though. If your libraries are such that your objects correspond fairly closely to Cocoas, you might be better off using Cocoa.
The real value of Objective-C lies in its dynamic nature, which if you were writing a cross-platform C++ library you might not be able to make much effective use of.
I wouldn't worry that Carbon is being phased out, or that there will be new shiny functionality only accessible from Cocoa. In my experience thats not really the case at all. There is definitely functionality only accessible from Carbon (and lots of it) and Carbon is quite well supported. A lot of non-GUI Cocoa stuff (FoundationKit) is more or less duplicated with CoreFoundation (which is a straight C interface, accessible from both and interoperable with corresponding Cocoa classes). Lots of important apps are written in Carbon. Carbon works well with interface builder (you end up writing a LOT of event handlers, but they are straightforward).
Check out the first ever team from West Australia, Sungroper who have put together their entry on a comparitive shoestring. Designed and built by geeks in their part time, and mostly financed by them as well.
Not likely to be a winner, as its going up against industrial prototypes worth millions.
But an inspiring example of what geeks can do when they put their mind to it.
One of the team founders is a very well known Macintosh programmer, Peter Lewis.
Regards
David
I live in Western Australia, I work in New York. I get paid what is an OK rate for New York, but a great rate when converted into Australian Dollars. It would be hard to find as interesting a company to work for here. And I get to live here, which has a fantastic climate (if you like heat, which I do), great quality of life, etc. And, of course, live with my family,
I'm not the only one in the company, either, we have a few in the same position, and the COO also lives in a different city to everyone else.
The time zone is a pain, but I tend to be nocturnal anyway.
Cheers
David
Slashdot Mirror
I've taken a look at the same problem recently.
My feeling is that while Cocoa is a better choice for developing Mac OS X specific stuff, Carbon may end up being more similar to other platforms, and so possibly a bit easier for this specific use. Cocoa is still very doable for the same problem - but essentially, I suspect many C++ methods would just end up being a call to an equivalent Cocoa method (though often one you've written yourself). Mixing C and C++ is not particularly ugly or hackish in most cases. You can more of less mix the two syntaxes easily enough with Apples Objective-C++ support.
It kind of depends on your specific libraries, though. If your libraries are such that your objects correspond fairly closely to Cocoas, you might be better off using Cocoa.
The real value of Objective-C lies in its dynamic nature, which if you were writing a cross-platform C++ library you might not be able to make much effective use of.
I wouldn't worry that Carbon is being phased out, or that there will be new shiny functionality only accessible from Cocoa. In my experience thats not really the case at all. There is definitely functionality only accessible from Carbon (and lots of it) and Carbon is quite well supported. A lot of non-GUI Cocoa stuff (FoundationKit) is more or less duplicated with CoreFoundation (which is a straight C interface, accessible from both and interoperable with corresponding Cocoa classes). Lots of important apps are written in Carbon. Carbon works well with interface builder (you end up writing a LOT of event handlers, but they are straightforward).
Check out the first ever team from West Australia, Sungroper who have put together their entry on a comparitive shoestring. Designed and built by geeks in their part time, and mostly financed by them as well.
Not likely to be a winner, as its going up against industrial prototypes worth millions. But an inspiring example of what geeks can do when they put their mind to it.
One of the team founders is a very well known Macintosh programmer, Peter Lewis.
Regards
David
I live in Western Australia, I work in New York. I get paid what is an OK rate for New York, but a great rate when converted into Australian Dollars. It would be hard to find as interesting a company to work for here. And I get to live here, which has a fantastic climate (if you like heat, which I do), great quality of life, etc. And, of course, live with my family, I'm not the only one in the company, either, we have a few in the same position, and the COO also lives in a different city to everyone else. The time zone is a pain, but I tend to be nocturnal anyway. Cheers David